By Plenary Sessions: Urve Tiidus

There is no direct oppositional stance, as the speaker is asking the minister for clarification and practical examples regarding the work already underway. The criticism is aimed at the speed and specific substance of the policy implementation, not the minister personally.

Data is scarce.

No direct opposition is voiced, but a challenge is posed to the Chancellor of Justice’s position regarding the expenditure of state funds on technology that restricts fundamental rights. The criticism is policy-driven and focuses on the practical applicability of the position in global cyberspace.

Data missing

There is no direct criticism aimed at political opponents or specific groups. The focus is instead on mitigating market failures and overcoming regulatory hurdles, such as the need to review requirements set by the Transport Administration. The issues are framed primarily as regulatory or market-based obstacles, rather than political opposition.

Criticism is directed against the authors of the draft legislation, whose forecasts and justifications for the regulation are being called into question. The criticism is policy-based, focusing on whether the authors of the bill acknowledge that only a very small number of cooperatives will be able to meet the requirements. The intensity of the opposition is moderate, manifesting itself through the request for questions and explanations.